Mumbai Court July 2005 Judgments

Berg Trading Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)(188)ELT293Tri(Mum.)bai

1. As per the facts on records, the appellants imported one consignment declaring the same as "Re-mE.L.T.ed Brass Ingots" and filed a Bill of Entry on 12-8-97 for clearance of the goods. However, on examination on first check basis conducted on 10-9-97, the same were found to be high copper content re-mE.L.T.ed ingots. The samples of the goods were taken and result showed the goods to be copper ingots. The value of the said goods was found to be approximately US $ 1800 per MT based upon the LME price.2. On the above basis, proceedings were initiated against the appellants for confirming differential demand of duty of Rs. 7,49,255/- and for imposition of personal penalty.3. The appellants contended that even before the first check by the Customs on 10-9-97, they had written a letter dated 29-8-97 disclosing that as per the information received by them, their suppliers had shipped the wrong consignment instead of consignment of brass ingots.They have by mistake shipped the copper ingots...

Commissioner of Customs Vs. S.V. Mazumdar

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)(190)ELT78Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The respondents herein were engaged in the import and export and manufacturing of various types of pulses like Moong Dhal, Urad Dhal etc. They imported goods from Australia and declared them to be Masoor Whole. For the purpose of duty free import of the goods, they obtained Advance Licences and also necessary permits from the Directorate of Plant and Quarantine and Storage, Ministry of Agriculture. The DRI conducted investigations against not only the respondents but several other importers of the same goods, which culminated in the issue of show cause notices in which the respondents as well as others were alleged to have imported 'Vetch Seed' in the guise of Masoor Dhal. It was alleged that the Vetch Seeds imported contained toxic substances and being unfit for human consumption, were prohibited for import. Duty demands were raised against all the importers and penal actions were also proposed against the importers and their officials and also CHAs and independent agents. Details...

Galaxy Sanitarywares (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)(189)ELT162Tri(Mum.)bai

1. Appellants are manufacturer of Ceramic Sanitaryware and other articles of Ceramics. On such Ceramic Sanitary-ware they use the mark 'Galaxy Vitreous'. The benefits of notification has been claimed on the ground that the mark so used belongs to another person.2. We have heard both sides. The admitted position is that there is another partnership unit in the same compound which also manufactures Ceramic Sanitaryware and were conducting business and using the same marks since 1992. The present appellant came into and started the use of the mark since 1995. It is well settled that first user in time will get right to the 'mark' used on the wares for commercial purposes. The plea of 'Galaxy' being a word derived from the Companies name & 'Vitreous' is only to denote the quality therefore cannot be assist the assessee. However, we find merits in the Id. Advocate for the appellant that such of the goods which are other than Sanitary ware and even on sanitary ware when other marks like...

Harshad Jethalal Shah and anr. and Maanish Kantilal Patel and anr. Vs. ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2005(5)BomCR11

ORDERS.U. Kamdar, J.1. By the present notice of motion the applicants are challenging clause 4 of the consent terms dated 15.4.2004 executed by and between the plaintiffs and the defendants. By prayer (b), (c) and (d) of the motion, the plaintiffs are claiming that they should be put back in possession of a property being bungalow and immovable property situated at Vishwas Colony, R.C. Datta Road, Sayaji Gunj, Division, Vadodara City of an area of 15,807 sq. ft. The plaintiffs have also prayed various interim injunctions against the parties from transferring, alienating, encumbering, dealing with and/or selling the said properties and/or from carrying on any construction thereon. Some of the material facts in the back ground of which the aforesaid reliefs are made are briefly enumerated as under :2. One Shalini Devi Ghatge died on 12.8.1982 leaving behind her last Will and Testament dated 4.8.1982. Under the said last will, Shalini Devi bequeathed an immovable property which is the sub...

Netaji Ishwar Ambegave Vs. Maharashtra State Secondary and Higher Seco ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: AIR2005Bom332; 2006(2)BomCR164; 2005(4)MhLj778

S.P. Kukday, J.1. In this petition, petitioner impugns decision of respondent-Maharashtra State Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Board, Aurangabad, to cancel his admission to the 12th Standard.2. Petitioner was taking education in Military School, Satara, which has adopted C. B. S. E. curriculum having 10 + 2 pattern. Petitioner appeared in the annual promotion examination of XI Std. held in the month of March/April, 2004 and secured aggregate 42% marks. According to Rules of the School, it was necessary to secure 40% marks in each subject with aggregate of 50%. As petitioner failed to achieve requisite standard, he was declared as failed. Petitioner, therefore, withdrew from the School and took provisional admission in XIIth Std, in Godavari Junior College, Aurangabad. As the petitioner was migrating from another Board, the matter was referred to the Maharashtra Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Board (hereinafter referred to as the Board) for confirmation of the admiss...

Sharad Keshao Ghonge, Proprietor, DiglIn Industries Vs. State of Mahar ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(1)BomCR428; (2005)107BOMLR1088; 2006(2)MhLj356

F.I. Rebello, J.1. Rule heard forthwith.2. The petitioner had submitted his tender pursuant to tender notice dated 7th March, 2005. One other tenderer was respondent No. 5, who had applied as proprietor of Samsal Telecom. One of the conditions of the tender was Clause 3(v), which reads as under:'5(v) Contractor/company should submit a certificate of registration from competent authority. Contractor/company should submit necessary document/certificates satisfying above conditions duly attested by the Gazetted office at the time of purchasing of tender. No tender will be issued otherwise.'The tender booklet under the head instructions for the tenderer under item No. 6 provided as under:'6 Dealer Possession Licence:- Tender should have a valid dealer Possession License (DPL) for minimum of 100 sets.' 3. It is the case of the petitioner that the he has been doing the work of maintenance which is the subject matter of the present tender since June, 2001 for the respondent authorities. He ha...

Shri Chatrapati Shivaji Mahavidyalaya Vs. Mansingh S/O Dhondiba Shitol ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2006(1)ALLMR331; 2005(4)MhLj1095

A.B. Naik, J.1. This writ petition is on weekly board since last two weeks when it's turn came it is called out today at 2.15 p.m. Shri S. M. Kulkarni, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner opened the case and has made his elaborate submissions and he concluded his submissions at 4 p.m. As the other side was called to answer the point raised by Shri Kulkarni, though there are two advocates on record, none present. Shri Ram Deshpande, learned advocate instructed by Shri S. C. Bora, informed that the respondent Mansing has taken away the papers from Shri Bora, advocate who filed his V.P. initially and accordingly, Shri Bora, has handed over all the papers to the respondent. Thereupon then Shri Deshpande, or for that purpose 'Shri Bora, advocate are not in position to reply the contention. Shri S. B. Talekar, has filed his V. P. Today, when the other side is called upon, Shri S. A. Kulkarni, who is present in the Court, holding for Shri Talekar, till the arguments of Mr. S. M. Kul...

Jet Speed Audio Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. The Appeals No. E/56 to 59/04, filed by an assessee and their Directors and officers against order dated 30-9-2003 of CCE against order dated 30-9-2003 of CCE-Mumbai V and Appeal No. E/1823/01 with cross-objection E/CO/148/01, filed by Revenue and the assessee, against order of Commissioner (Appeals) No. ZBN/82/MV/2001, dated 5-3-01. They pertain to determination of assessable values. They are being disposed off by this common order, after hearing both sides.1.2 Assessee is engaged, since March, 1996, in manufacture of excisable goods, viz Compact Disc (hereinafter referred to as CD for short), the process is, actually duplicating and recording the CD for and on behalf of Music Companies from a stamper made from master known as DAT, supplied by the Music Companies. The valuation of these CD's, so duplicated, were questioned on the grounds that various costs i.e. of copyright of DAT master, positive art work, inlay costs, jewel box for packing, supplied by the music companies, were ...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Pharma Medico (i) Pvt. Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2005)(190)ELT254Tri(Mum.)bai

1. The issue for determination in these appeals is the classification of Imidil dusting powder and Mi-cocept dusting powder manufactured and cleared by the assessees during the period in dispute - whether under GET sub-heading 3003.20 as pharmacopoeial products, as claimed by the assessees or under GET sub-heading 3304.00 as preparations for care of skin, as contended by the Revenue.3. The products were tested by Chief Chemist whose report is reproduced below:- "The sample is in the form of white powder in an original unit container packing of 100 gms. It is mainly composed of talcum powder and perfumery compounds. To ascertain the exact composition of the product, on the spot study of manufacturing process and ingredients used is required." 4. Show cause notice dated 5-2-1996 proposing recovery of duty of Rs. 46,598/- on the ground that the products were preparations for care of the skin and proposing imposition of penalty was issued to the assessees which was adjudicated by the Assi...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Leak Proof Engg (i) Pvt. Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

1. Assessee had availed benefit Revenue Expenditure under Section 35 of Income Tax Act 1962 in Capital Goods. Revenue is in appeal against that the Order of CCE Appeals who modified the order of the Jt. Commissioner to the extent that the assessee were entitled to Modvat Credit on Capital Goods up 23/7/98 and restored the same, if paid back & held that penalty was not imposable since there was no suppression of facts holding. I have given my careful consideration to the contentions of rival slides and find that for the period from 1/4/94 to 22/7/98 there was no bar on the appellants on availing Modvat credit on capital goods if revenue expenditure was claimed by the manufacturer on that portion of the value of such capital goods which represented excise duty. This contention of theirs is beyond any doubt as the Sub-rule 5 of Rule 57R(5) was amended in terms of Notfn No. 14/96-CE(NT) dtd. 23/7/96 so as to include the aforesaid revenue expenditure barring modvat claim on the depreci...